OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The Title V Project at the Medical Sciences Campus aims to expand the knowledge in Clinical and Translational Research (CTR) and diversify the CTR workforce throughout Puerto Rico. A Pilot Project Program (PiP) offers research training for Undergraduate students (UgS), Graduate Students (GS), and Undergraduate program Faculty (UgF). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Since 2021, the Title V Project has established a rolling application process to which researchers from any scientific background related to CTR in all post-secondary institutions in Puerto Rico may submit research proposals. These are peer-reviewed considering the following criteria: the research team composition must include UgS, GS, and UgF; the primary researcher’s expertise; the significance of the proposed topic related to Puerto Rico’s health problems; and the research plan’s quality. In addition, proposals must include a career plan for student and faculty members to participate in further training in CTR-related topics, such as scientific communication and statistical analyses, also offered through the Title V program. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Twelve (12) PiP research teams showcase diversity in research areas with representation from Nursing, Occupational Therapy, Cancer, Cell Biology, Microbiology, Anatomy and Medical Images, Electro-Chemistry, Anatomy, and Physiology. In addition, Pip’s team members represent eleven (11) different institutions across seven different geographical areas, whose complete profiles we delineate in the presentation. Teams have the participation of twelve (12) primary researchers, five (5) mentors, twelve (12) UgF, seventeen (17) UGs, four (4) medical students in different stages, and nine (9) GS. We will present the composition, research topics, development, and participants' feedback. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The PiP program has been instrumental in organizing interdisciplinary and interinstitutional research teams. It has proven to be an effective strategy for fostering inclusion, diversity, and equity in CTR and promotes the practice of team science. Teams' research responds to health issues in this Hispanic population.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To comprehensively understand the training needs of clinical research professionals (CRPs) employed across various roles in team science. The purpose is to identify areas for competency development and determine the modality of training desired to enhance their skills further. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This study targets Clinical Research Professionals (CRPs) across various roles in Academic Health Centers via an online survey. From novices to experts, participants are often trained on the job covering some clinical research competencies, but team science aspects like communication and leadership are usually overlooked. The survey will assess current skills, identify training gaps, and explore preferred learning methods and topics. Participants will be recruited through the CTSA hub research network. Additionally, they'll share experiences of team cohesion, dynamics, conflict, and their contributions to the team through participation in focus group sessions.The focus groups will be held via Zoom with volunteer participants from the survey (6 per session, 3 sessions, N=18). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The recently developed leveled CRP team science competencies based on Lotrechianno (2022) will be the basis of the survey items. Demographic characteristics of the participants by role will be presented. Moreover, perceptions of team science applications, learning needs and training preferences will be described. Results will be compared across CRP roles. Finally, three recorded and transcribed focus groups (n=18) will contribute to knowledge gained through this research allowing for a deeper understanding of training needs. Qualitative analyzes of recorded focus-group discussions will present key themes. Qualitative data will be coded by more than two people for interrater reliability. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study offers the first needs assessment on academic medical center CRP team science learning requirements, utilizing newly established CRP individual and team competencies. Findings will guide the creation of tailored training and research initiatives.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The purpose of this study was to assess if the Mentoring Competency Assessment (MCA) could be used to capture mentee gains in mentorship skills and how the mentorship competencies may vary structurally for mentees compared to mentors, while the original MCA was shown to be a validated measure to assess mentor skills. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The mentee training survey data were collected nationally from 2015 to 2022. The survey data set included 401 respondents who consented to participate after 59 mentee training events hosted by 34 institutions/organizations who participated in face-to-face and online training as well as completed the Mentoring Competency Assessment (MCA) in their surveys. We conducted principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation to investigate the internal structure of the MCA and Hatcher’s criteria were applied. After a team of mentoring experts independently interpreted the PCA results and reached a consensus on the interpretations of the components, factor analysis and internal consistency reliability analysis were applied to assess the construct validity and the reliability. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: There were significant component loadings of the eight components with varimax rotation and 22 of the total 26 items were loaded into components. Four items, (5) pursuing strategies to improve communication, (6) coordinating with other mentors, (11) developing strategies to meet goals, and (23) setting career goals, were excluded from the factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha analysis since these items were not significantly loaded into any components. The eight-component structure was validated (χ2=313.209, p<.001, RMSEA=.083, CFI=.907, TLI=.881, SRMR=.073) and the hypothesized model of the eight components resulted in an acceptable fit to the data with standardized factor loadings ranging from 0.58 to 0.93. The alpha coefficient is from 0.58 to 0.90, suggesting the items have high internal consistency. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Based upon the findings we recommend that the full revised MCA for mentees is used to capture mentees’ mentorship skill gains even if not all of the competency modules are used in the training. The development and validation of measures such as the MCA are important as we move toward the use of common measures across programs such as the CTSAs.

Organizations supporting translational research and translational science, including Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs, provide a diverse and often changing array of resources, support, and services to a myriad of researchers and research efforts. While a wide-ranging scope of programs is essential to the advancement of translational research and science, it also complicates a systematic and unified process for tracking activities, studying research processes, and examining impact. To overcome these challenges, the Duke University School of Medicine’s CTSA hub created a data platform, Translational Research Accomplishment Cataloguer (TRACER), that provides capacity to enhance strategic decision-making, impact assessment, and equitable resource distribution. This article reviews TRACER development processes, provides an overview of the TRACER platform, addresses challenges in the development process, and describes avenues for addressing or overcoming these challenges. TRACER development allowed our hub to conceptually identify key processes and goals within programs and linkages between programs, and it sets the stage for advancing evidence-based improvement across our hub. This platform development provides key insight into facilitators that can inform other initiatives seeking to collect and align organizational data for strategic decision-making and impact assessment. TRACER or similar platforms are additionally well positioned to advance the study of translational science.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Community-based primary care autism diagnostic models are one promising solution to delays in autism diagnosis. Our objective is to describe the development and report on outcomes related to primary care professional (PCP) training and sustained engagement in a longitudinal learning collaborative across a statewide network for autism diagnosis. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We developed ADAPT (i.e., Accelerating the Diagnosis of Autism with Primary care Training), a training program to prepare PCPs to develop independent competency in evaluation of autism in children ages 14-48 months. ADAPT includes didactic and case-based modules and expert practice-based coaching delivered by a diagnostic specialist; following training PCPs participate in a longitudinal learning collaborative. Aligned with competency-based medical education standards, measures of autism evaluation knowledge and diagnostic competency are collected. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To date, 13 PCPs have completed ADAPT didactic and practicum training reaching competency in independent autism evaluation. Clinicians demonstrated significant improvement in total autism knowledge following didactic training (p=.02). There was an overall trend toward increased scoring agreement on an autism observational assessment over case observations and practicum evaluations. Similarly, PCPs demonstrated improved evaluation competence, moving on average from Advanced Beginner to Competent Performer as rated by expert trainers. Following training, PCPs attended 57% of monthly learning collaborative sessions. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Training PCPs to deliver autism evaluations as part of community-based models of care is a promising solution to address access and waitlist challenges. ADAPT is an intensive, standard PCP training model which results in achievement of independent competency and sustained engagement in in autism evaluation.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Community-based residency programs often lack formal training in research scholarship required by ACGME. To address this need, UCSF’s CTSI collaborated with residency leaders to implement a self-paced online curriculum for residents called Training in Practice Based Research (TIPR). We describe characteristics of the initial trainee cohort. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In the 2022-23 academic year, TIPR was offered to 10 UCSF-affiliated family medicine residency programs across Northern California and the Central Valley, and 8 chose to participate. An additional community-based psychiatry residency independently contacted our team and was also granted permission to participate. We conducted baseline surveys with participants to understand their prior research experience and motivation to join TIPR. Descriptive data for demographics of trainees and their prior research experience were collected using Qualtrics. Thematic analyses were conducted on qualitative responses. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Of 32 participants, 29 completed the survey (91%). Learners identified as 40% non-Hispanic White, 28% Asian, 16% Hispanic, 9% non-Hispanic Black, and 15% non-Hispanic other. 28% were motivated to participate in the program because it was a residency requirement, 31% wanted to improve their scholarly skills and confidence, 16% were interested in career development, and 6% were interested in networking. 19% reported no research experience. Participants are currently working on scholarly projects designed during the first year of TIPR. In 2023-2024, with the addition of two new family medicine residency programs, an additional 40 residents have enrolled in TIPR. In April 2024, we will present data on projects completed, and demographics of the full cohort. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: With CTSI support, TIPR has reached a large cohort of ethnically diverse physician trainees in community-based settings. Future evaluation will focus on whether TIPR increases the quantity and quality of practice-based research within residency training programs served by this program.

Retrospective case studies are one approach to help identify processes underlying the translation of successful health interventions. This case study investigates the development of RealRisks and Breast Cancer Risk Navigation (BNAV), decision support tools for breast cancer risk assessment, and risk-stratified prevention. Following a recently developed protocol for retrospective translational science case studies, we examined the career trajectory of Dr Katherine Crew as she expanded from basic science to interdisciplinary, patient-oriented research in oncology and began collaboration with Dr Rita Kukafka, a public health informatician focused on communicating risk. Data collection methods included key informant interviews and examination of peer-reviewed publications, funded grants, and news articles associated with the research. Data were analyzed to identify key milestones in the development of RealRisks and BNAV and to elucidate facilitators and barriers to the translational process. Facilitators to translation included funding and infrastructure provided by a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA), the creation of an interdisciplinary team, and broad support from stakeholders including patient advocacy groups. Barriers to translation included limited mid-career support, ongoing costs for technology, and the time required to establish interdisciplinary, team science efforts. The findings reported here can be used to inform ongoing efforts to develop a more robust science of translation.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe team science training that can be tailored to specific audiences, in this case, Clinical Research Professionals (CRP) using discipline-specific vignettes, and to highlight the benefits of audience-specific training in team science. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Translational science teams are comprised of members from various disciplines. All members can benefit from team science training. Our education team has incorporated discipline-specific training into educational offerings. This project focuses on education tailored to CRPs and their role in clinical research. Historically, team science training has been focused on faculty and trainees. The exclusion of CRPs can limit the impact of this training. We’ve created workshops specifically geared toward CRPs. This presentation demonstrates how we tailor team science training to CRPs by using relevant examples and real-world vignettes to highlight concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The team science workshops conducted specifically for CRPs have been well received. CRPs have been eager to engage with team science-related material. The number of team science workshops requested by CRP groups is continuing to increase. We will share both quantitative and qualitative evaluation results from several team science workshops conducted to-date. The inclusion of scenarios that relate to common situations encountered by CRPs has been especially helpful in demonstrating team science concepts they have personally experienced. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Helping CRPs directly apply team science concepts to their work is very valuable for improving high-functioning team behavior. CRPs can use new knowledge and skills to enhance efficiency and reduce stress and burnout. The impact of team science is maximized when all members of the team are trained.

At least 70% of premature adult deaths result from behaviors starting and reinforced in adolescence. The use of adolescent-centered outcomes and the necessity of creating space for the adolescent voice regarding research that directly impacts them is often overlooked. These omissions result in proposals and solutions that lack consideration of adolescent ingenuity, preferences, and needs. In 2021, Penn State PRO Wellness was awarded a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Engagement Award with the goal of addressing the gap in the inclusion of adolescents in research focused on teenage health. The resultant Adolescent Health Network (AHN) was developed in partnership with a stakeholder advisory board comprised of adolescents, parents, health researchers, and school staff. The AHN currently consists of 12 schools and 43 adolescents who have completed stakeholder training. For adolescents, the AHN simulates a school club or career enrichment activity with incoming freshmen replacing graduating seniors over time. For health researchers, the AHN provides rapid, easy access to a pool of adolescents with stakeholder training who are available to provide input on various aspects of a study from recruitment plans, to survey tools to dissemination strategies. This manuscript details the development, execution, and data from this novel program.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe the creation, use and outcome of a successful multi-session case study for team science education and training. Creating a case study that spans multiple sessions can aid in emphasizing many team science concepts using one ongoing scenario. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We will describe the creation and use of a multi-session case study used in a team science graduate course. This case study incorporates the interpretation and use of assessments that coincide with concepts presented in each session. Participants engage with the case study as a team. The use of this case study allows participants to draw conclusions and make decisions about team interventions using concepts they’ve just learned. The multi-session case study also allows participants to see the outcome of their decisions in the next session. Further, the continuous nature of this case study allows participants to build on their knowledge from session to session and make connections between concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Incorporating a multi-session case study should help participants better understand team science concepts and practice incorporating the use of those concepts into teams in a more realistic way over time. The case study framework has been used in a team science graduate course for the last two years. The teaching team has incorporated continuous improvement into optimizing the case study over time. We’ll share preliminary results collected over the use of the case study so far along with the improvements made over time. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This education framework is very versatile and can be incorporated into a team science course or series of workshops and provides a real-world situation that allows participants to practice incorporating team science concepts and interventions in a team.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: We have evaluated the primary factors behind successful expansion of the predoctoral TL1 training grant at OHSU to all research-intensive universities in the state, evaluating the precepts that were key to integration. We also evaluate inclusion of social and behavioral sciences in clinical and translational science training, METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: OHSU contains three professional schools (medicine, nursing, and dentistry) as well as graduate studies in science. There are also three research-intensive universities in Oregon: Portland State University (PSU); Oregon State University (OSU) in Corvallis; and the University of Oregon (UO). We report evaluation of our 7-year experience with a predoctoral TL1 program and the precepts behind successful implementation of statewide outreach. We have tracked applicants from each university and program, trainee feedback, and success of the applicants as measured by persistence in research, inclusion of translational methods, additional training acquired, and subsequent research funding. We also evaluate participation by behavioral and social scientists. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The predoctoral TL1 has included 40 scholars over 7 years, with 65% PhD graduate students and 35% MD students who pursue an additional research degree (PhD, MCR). Of PhD graduate students, the distribution is similar among universities: OHSU 31%, PSU 19%, OSU 27%, UO 23%. 38% of all graduate student trainees are in behavioral or social science. Key precepts behind success include: concentration on specific graduate programs at each university; implementing a common curriculum based on the MCR curriculum; interinstitutional mentor teams; leadership team that spans universities; required core TL1 activities; and a competitive application process with an interinstitutional review committee. Applicants are required to identify how translational science education enhances their research career. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Creating a statewide resource for TL1 translational science training has increased opportunities to expand translational research throughout Oregon through providing new opportunities to enhance excellence through disseminating resources and training across the universities.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To teach the historical development of CTR, make a compelling scientific presentation, and use bibliographic databases and library resources. In addition, students learn how to write the research question, design the career development plan, know the protection of human subjects in research, and understand the mentor-mentee relationship. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The course includes a variety of educational strategies and activities that allow the student to increase their knowledge and initiate their interest in the field of CTR. Both academic semesters (August to December and January to May) are offered remotely in two-hour synchronous sessions on Fridays from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. through videoconferences, in addition to asynchronous activities. Invited expert lecturers and faculty reinforce the course content in each of the topics they address. In addition, course coodinators assign guided tasks where the students perform the work. Then, they present or send their work to the course coordinators for evaluation. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The course began in January 2020 and has six offerings, including one in the current academic semester (August to December 2023). Its first offering was in the semester from January to May, and due to the interest generated in students in August 2022, it is now avalilable in both semesters. From its beginning to the present, the course has included students from the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) Bayamón, Cayey, Humacao, Mayagüez, and Rio Piedras campuses, impacting all geographic areas of Puerto Rico. The course has also represented an opportunity for graduate faculty to teach CTR to undergraduate students. Until 2023, 56 students have enrolled. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Upon completing six-course offerings, the evaluation carried out by the students demonstrates satisfaction with the learning obtained. The knowledge and skills achieved have led them to participate in CTR with the mentoring of collaborating course professors and starting a new professional development opportunity for undergraduate students.

Educational opportunities for investigators and staff to promote inclusive research practices are a critical piece of the effort to increase diversity in study participation and promote health equity. However, few trainings to date have empirically been shown to result in behavior changes. We present preliminary evaluation findings for the Just Research workshop offered at the University of Wisconsin–Madison between October 2022 and August 2023. These sessions included 80 participants who made up 4 cohorts. Data was collected through a retrospective pre/post-test survey administered 0–7 days following the workshop (n = 70), and a follow-up survey administered 9–12 months following the workshop (n = 21). Participants demonstrate significant increases in knowledge and self-efficacy regarding implementing inclusive practices post-intervention (p < .001). 85.7% of participants who completed the follow-up survey reported implementing inclusive practices.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Our objective was to evaluate the FLEX Leadership Development Program for School of Medicine Women Faculty affiliated with 4 independent hospital systems throughout Northern Ohio to determine whether women faculty develop leader self and means efficacy. We also examined whether self-efficacy is sustained over time following program completion. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We did a prospective multiple cohort study to determine whether FLEX Program graduates develop and sustain leader self and means efficacy as measured by the Leader Efficacy Questionnaire (LEQ) (Hannah & Avolio, 2012). The LEQ assesses both leader confidence in their capabilities (self-efficacy) and the availability of sufficient external resources (means efficacy) to achieve their goals. We surveyed participants from 5 FLEX cohorts (2017-2021) using a pre-, post-, and 1-year follow-up LEQ, which allowed each participant to act as their own control subject, pre-test, and experimental post-test. The follow-up tested whether the change from pre- to post-test was sustained over time. The comparison group was non-participant women faculty from the same institutions over a similar 2-year period. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Diverse FLEX graduates from 5 different cohorts showed highly significant increases in pre- to post-program leader self-efficacy which were sustained up to one year after program completion. Overall leader efficacy as well as its three component sub-constructs (action-, means- and self-regulation- efficacy) all significantly increased equally, suggesting both that the FLEX program had robust effects on its participants, and all aspects of leader efficacy improved. We observed a mildly significant decrease at 1-year follow-up in the overall LEQ, which appeared to be driven entirely by the leader means efficacy. The large comparison group of women faculty did not show any significant changes in leader self-efficacy over a comparable 2-year period. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: FLEX confers sustainable gains in leader self-efficacy. Post-program self-efficacy decreases are driven by the leader means efficacy which measures how work environments affect their leadership. This suggests that institutions must take responsibility for making structural changes to improve the working environment for women leaders.